Seems that way, yes.
Should there be a free star trek.
- Thread starter Rigelkent
- Start date
Yeah, @1001001 moved it here just to get it out of General Trek, it seems. I feel bad for the moderator here. It's a hypothetical question (and a bit of an uninformed one at best), but I see no connection to fan productions.
Star Trek as a corporate product never owned by the Roddenberry estate probably should've been released into the public domain a long time ago, but it's a beneficiary of the continuous battle against the public domain by corporations and probably won't be released until at least 2061 (current law), and likely long after that, and that will only apply to the early episodes and characters of TOS.
Alot of Star Trek concepts, like warp drive (in general), transporters, and phase weaponry isn't really copyrightable, and can already be used freely. Other things, like a Federation of planets, or a Star Fleet, are acceptable in theory, but the totality of evidence utilizing all of it might be a bit sketchy and get one into trouble. Individual characters, of course, are a no-go, as well as the big thing Star Trek has going for it: the variety of alien races and cultures. You would have to do a legally distinct pastiche or original species and cultures, which would lose some of its Star Trek feel (although, that's kind of the point).
Star Trek is ~35 years younger than Steamboat Willie, and that's not PD yet.
Copyright is a tricky issue. So many of us are against big corporations keeping them for so long but imagine the inverse: you create a property and have some moderate success with it but never make a fortune, then X years later it falls into the PD and then some big money corporation grabs it, makes it into a major motion picture (i.e. Aladdin) and you get not one red cent. In either circumstance. I'd rather overprotect properties than underprotected leading to the latter scenario.
Copyright is a tricky issue. So many of us are against big corporations keeping them for so long but imagine the inverse: you create a property and have some moderate success with it but never make a fortune, then X years later it falls into the PD and then some big money corporation grabs it, makes it into a major motion picture (i.e. Aladdin) and you get not one red cent. In either circumstance. I'd rather overprotect properties than underprotected leading to the latter scenario.
I genuinely did not understand what the OP was after. I tried and failed to get clarity.
The idea that the owners of Star Trek would abandon their copyright so other companies could make Star Trek never occurred to me. That’s so far out there.
It reminded me of the whole Axanar thing and the new rules about fan productions. I am so sorry that I misinterpreted it and made you see the thread here.
In any event, the moderator here is free to close it should they see fit. Then our long nightmare will be over.
I think this is the biggest challenge for people. So many times I see people go "Well, such and such company should just release it" without any recognition that this company has spent resources on that property, either to obtain it, defend it or create it. Imagining oneself in that situation would be nice to realize that personal property actually means something to the person who owns it, not just because of fan devotion.
Completely agree with Maurice...
Let me turn the question back towards you @Rigelkent...If ever you came up with an idea like Peanuts by Charles Schultz, Harry Potter and of course Star Trek by Roddenberry, where you had to struggle for many years conceiving it and finally working on it...and finally you taste success from the fruits of your labour...
Would YOU then because some fans who can't come up with their own ideas and didn't work for years making it the success it has become, would YOU say OK, I will allow any Tom Dick and Harry to do with your ''baby'' what they want?
If you say yes I think you're not being honest with yourself
Let me turn the question back towards you @Rigelkent...If ever you came up with an idea like Peanuts by Charles Schultz, Harry Potter and of course Star Trek by Roddenberry, where you had to struggle for many years conceiving it and finally working on it...and finally you taste success from the fruits of your labour...
Would YOU then because some fans who can't come up with their own ideas and didn't work for years making it the success it has become, would YOU say OK, I will allow any Tom Dick and Harry to do with your ''baby'' what they want?
If you say yes I think you're not being honest with yourself
Steamboat Willie is the reason why The Man Trap is slated for Public Domain in 2061 and not 2022 as it was at time of release.
Personally, I don't see how the ongoing Star Trek franchise is harmed by a few old episodes being released on YouTube, and, yes, fan productions freely based on those early Trek episodes. There's a difference between a public domain window to allow for an author to receive profit in his lifetime or a corporation a reasonable time frame, and the near-perpetuity that presently exists where they keep moving the goalposts everytime a certain character nears the release date.
A couple of decades ago Disney tried to argue for infinite copyrights. It's exactly what copyright was designed not to do. it has gotten out of hand and it has led to lazy mba driven media companies sitting comfortably on fat reserves of franchise pabulum. It doesn't advance art. I am glad Star Trek is still around. If it's a good enough myth it will persist, albeit in a multitude of hands. I agree with the OP, actually. But it isn't going to happen. Not in name, anyway.
Galaxy Quest, Turkish Star Trek, and the Orville are proof enough that demand will find a way to be met, just the same.
I have a follow up question that is more of a personal curiosity than anything else. What do content creators owe their fans?
I'll be okay. <3
And yeah, like @Maurice said, whoo doggy, this is a pipe dream.
What do content creators owe our fans? I think kinda following Wheaton's Rule more than anything else. Kinda helps if the fans follow it as well. And I'm not so sure that making $$ off the creators' intellectual property, without permission, is doing that.
Rail all you want to against big corporations. No problem. Vive le working homme (I've forgotten how to say working in French and am too lazy and tired to look it up right now)! But a lot of creators aren't so big. Short copyrights can hit small operations hard. I, for one, want to will my copyrights to my nephews. And I intend to be around for a while longer.
I'm very torn on the issue, but I've never been convinced by the argument that things remaining under copyright stifles creativity. Buck Rogers didn't prevent Flash Gordon didn't prevent Barbarella didn't prevent Star Wars. Forbidden Planet didn't prevent Lost In Space didn't prevent Star Trek. No one is stopping anyone from rolling their own. Star Wars is arguably a better creation precisely because Lucas could not use Flash Gordon.
The advantage of a name property is it's massively easier to get eyeballs on it because of the name: built in potential fanbase/backers/media buzz. That's really the heart of it.
And even when Steamboat Willie finally falls into the PD that doesn't mean everyone will be able to use Mickey Mouse because Mickey is a Trademarked brand and that's a whole 'nother kettle of rodent stew.
The advantage of a name property is it's massively easier to get eyeballs on it because of the name: built in potential fanbase/backers/media buzz. That's really the heart of it.
And even when Steamboat Willie finally falls into the PD that doesn't mean everyone will be able to use Mickey Mouse because Mickey is a Trademarked brand and that's a whole 'nother kettle of rodent stew.
Last edited:
I don't know that's what the OP meant but it's sure how it came across to me.
I'm simply guessing here that you want Paramount et al, to ease restrictions, so as to let people free to make Star Trek at will. Perhaps even make a little scratch from it, and have Paramount look the other way.
Well, they did that for many years. (minus the filthy lucre) Fans have been making their films at will for years, and I gobbled most of them up as they came out. Even the ones that were less than stellar. There's a place for it, as well as an admiration for those that were inspired enough to see it through, from conception to completion. It was done for the love of it, and nothing more. It scratched a particular itch of mine. Definitely nostalgia. I can't stress enough though, that when I saw 'Starship Exeter' way back when, I was baffled at how it could be done, and enthusiastic about it.
Then, a certain company made a film, and tried to profit beyond it, and pissed off a lot of people.
The owners of the IP, corporate demons or not, were understandably pissed off and took action.
To quote Lt. Kevin Riley: "No dance tonight."
Since then, I have seen several productions that basically violated the guidelines. A full feature (that needs a sound edit!) Also, a two part stand alone episode, that fully exceeds the 15 minute guidelines. As of typing this, they haven't been struck down by copywrite violations or cease and desist orders. Why is that?
I would conjecture that because the corporate monsters know that because their intent is reasonably pure, they allow it.
The guidelines were made for profiteers, in my opinion.
So, short answer, no... no one should profit from Trek that isn't involved with the corporate demons, unless said corporate demons want to make a deal.
Take the inspiration, and make something new. There's nothing wrong with a fan flick. I'm an easy pinch. I love them, warts and all. However, I'd be just as chuffed if someone would take all that enthusiasm and energy, and make something fresh and new. Just my thoughts on it. Your mileage may vary.
Well, they did that for many years. (minus the filthy lucre) Fans have been making their films at will for years, and I gobbled most of them up as they came out. Even the ones that were less than stellar. There's a place for it, as well as an admiration for those that were inspired enough to see it through, from conception to completion. It was done for the love of it, and nothing more. It scratched a particular itch of mine. Definitely nostalgia. I can't stress enough though, that when I saw 'Starship Exeter' way back when, I was baffled at how it could be done, and enthusiastic about it.
Then, a certain company made a film, and tried to profit beyond it, and pissed off a lot of people.
The owners of the IP, corporate demons or not, were understandably pissed off and took action.
To quote Lt. Kevin Riley: "No dance tonight."
Since then, I have seen several productions that basically violated the guidelines. A full feature (that needs a sound edit!) Also, a two part stand alone episode, that fully exceeds the 15 minute guidelines. As of typing this, they haven't been struck down by copywrite violations or cease and desist orders. Why is that?
I would conjecture that because the corporate monsters know that because their intent is reasonably pure, they allow it.
The guidelines were made for profiteers, in my opinion.
So, short answer, no... no one should profit from Trek that isn't involved with the corporate demons, unless said corporate demons want to make a deal.
Take the inspiration, and make something new. There's nothing wrong with a fan flick. I'm an easy pinch. I love them, warts and all. However, I'd be just as chuffed if someone would take all that enthusiasm and energy, and make something fresh and new. Just my thoughts on it. Your mileage may vary.
Last edited:
Here's my take on this:
1) This newbie doesn't want to subscribe to CBSAA (soon to be Paramount+) because he doesn't want to pay for episodes of the new shows so in his own way, he wants to see a free Star Trek show that would air on CBS Prime (standard CBS) without having to pay for it. If I'm right, let me know; if I'm wrong, let me know.
2) The 'vampire shows, if I get this correctly, might be this one that's on YouTube exclusively, or any other current show about vampires. Again, correct me if I'm wrong.
Flash Gordon, IMHO, was (and is) a tired property that really can't be resurrected anymore (the idea that Mongo can simply come up to another planet doesn't work now for a modern audience in itself, and is just as lame an idea as Space:1999's concept was.) The only recent version of Flash Gordon I liked (and that was, IMHO, credible for a modern audience) was this one:
Last edited:
Will Star Trek be public domain in 2061?
Hey! The Reeves-Stevensons did Flash Gordon!
There's no wrong or right answer to the All Access question. Whatever your conscience or budget is okay with is the right answer.
I feel the same way you do about Trek, though the free month offers from CBS All Access got me. I decided to pay for two months, at half price after the latest free month offer ran out. I did that mostly to see The Stand, which I've got really behind on, and sort of lost interest in, but since I'm paying for it I'll catch up. I should also be able to see the first episode, and maybe a second, of Clarice before my subscription runs out. I don't plan on renewing it until I more new Trek comes out and there's another free month offer.
If you do want to catch up on the new Trek I recommend being on the lookout for the free month offers. That's how I saw Picard, Lower Decks, some of the Short Treks, and most of Discovery's third season. I must admit that it was nice seeing a new Trek episode every week just like in the old days when I was looking at Discovery this past season. But at the same time, All Access Trek isn't as filling to me as TOS or Berman-era Trek was.
Nothin' wrong with cheese.
The 1980 Flash Gordon is a great film...
Similar threads
